Evaluation of the Effects of the Strengthening Families Program in Quebec Adolescents and Parents Living in Challenging Family Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Strengthening Families Program (SFP) has recognized value in preventing criminality and drug use in adolescents from underprivileged backgrounds. The objective of this study was to measure the effects of a 14-week version of this program targeting adolescents 12-16 years old in two medium-sized Quebec municipalities, using a repeated-measure design. The study participants were: 1) an intervention group, consisting of 71 adolescents and 61 parents who participated in the SFP between January 2018 and December 2019; and 2) a comparison group, consisting of 57 adolescents and 56 parents. Multivariate longitudinal regression indicates that the SFP reinforces some protective factors, such as the parent-child relation, as well as some key dimensions of family strengths. However, no effect was observed on parenting practices or adolescents' social behaviour. The differences between the intervention and control groups, the clinical significance of the results, and challenges of evaluating the SFP are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".